Re: Fix reload ICE with define-split

[Roman Zippel <zippel at linux-m68k dot org>]

Hi,

On Mon, 26 Feb 2007, Richard Sandiford wrote:

> There's a behavioural difference here though.  Your patch copes only
> with cases where the original insn had an automodified address,
> whereas Nathan's copes with cases where the orignal insn didn't,
> It's not unresonable to imagine a splitter that increments an
> address and then decrements it again, leaving the final address the
> same as the original, and AIUI it isn't the backend's responsibility
> to add notes in that case.  So I think Nathan's is more correct in
> principle.

I don't disagree, see my other mail.
When I wrote the patch I looked through the other ports port and sh does 
something like you describe, but also adds the REG_INC notes. That was the
main reason why I only recreated existing notes.

bye, Roman